Karl Witt wrote:
>
> Those other things also gain you a performance advantage. Let's get real
> here, folks. I can understand where "maintenance" fixes consisting of
> replacing weak stock parts with sturdier ones (neon motor mounts, 911
> tensioners) aren't allowed because they become something that everyone HAS
> to to do stay competitive, and that raises the cost of of racing in the
> class.
I don't think that's it at all. In the case of the Neon, it's clearly a
possible performance enhancement. Stiffer motor mount, equals more
torque to the drivetrain. But the 911 chain tensioner issue is entirely
a preventative modification to prevent the engine from turning into an
expensive aluminum grenade. Yet, it clearly is an internal engine
modification, and hence opens the door for all sorts of other
interpretations that could start the 'slippery slope' syndrome. Yes, it
-should- be legal. But no, it isn't.
> But, we're talking about the price of GLUE here. No parts are being
> replaced. The analogy to retorquing bolts is very fitting here.
No, tightening down on an existing hose clamp yes, but gluing a part
that was never glued by the factory is not legal. Does that mean that
MR2 drivers can glue their crash bolts into place? Or even weld them
into place? No, they can't. Nor should RX7tt owners glue the hoses into
place. The factory didn't do it, and doesn't specifically authorize
anyone else to do the same. Every car has an achilles heel, some more
noticeable than others. The 911 has its chain tensioners, the RX7tt has
its turbo hoses, the F-stock crowd has it's flexing chassis, the M3 has
it's oiling problems, and so forth and so on.
-Josh2
--
Joshua Hadler '74 914 2.0 CSP/Bi - Hooligan Racing #29 - CONIVOR
'87 Quantum Syncro - aka stealth quattro
jhadler@rmi.net
http://rainbow.rmi.net/~jhadler/
|